Re: Modifications to hist.m

[Alois Schlögl]

Paul Kienzle wrote:

> Andy Adler wrote:
>
> > I propose the following patch to hist.m;
> > it results in about 2.5x speedup.
> At one point a rewrote hist to not have any
> loops.  I was doing a whole lot of really large
> histograms (e.g., 100000 values drawn from
> a poisson distribution --- I had to rewrite the
> poisson generator too ;-)
>
> Please check it out and tell me if it is any faster
> than what you've got.  I think it might be slower
> if you have a histogram with a lot of empty bins.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul Kienzle
> address@hidden



The original HIST.M was also to slow for me. My solution was 
implementing HISTO.M (see octave-forge/extra/tsa/ ) and the companion 
functions histo2, histo3, histo4 (histo2, histo3, and histo4 differ only 
if the input has multiple columns). All HISTO.M's use SORT.

However, HISTO has another difference: each sample value gets its own 
bin. For this reason, HISTO.M is not 1-to-1 compatible to HIST.M. I 
prefer the result from HISTO, because the bins do not depend on (max and 
min of) the samples as in HIST.


Alois